RULE OF LAW – EU’S COMMON CONSTITUTIONAL “DENOMINATOR” AND A CRUCIAL MEMBERSHIP CONDITION ON THE CHANGED AND EVOLUTIONARY ROLE OF THE RULE OF LAW VALUE IN THE EU CONTEXT

M. Vlajković
{"title":"RULE OF LAW – EU’S COMMON CONSTITUTIONAL “DENOMINATOR” AND A CRUCIAL MEMBERSHIP CONDITION ON THE CHANGED AND EVOLUTIONARY ROLE OF THE RULE OF LAW VALUE IN THE EU CONTEXT","authors":"M. Vlajković","doi":"10.25234/eclic/11903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For decades the Rule of Law has been emphasized as a core constitutional value common to all Member States of the European Union, although its substantial content was not precisely determined enough in the European context. Moreover it was defined as a multilayered value that encompasses other values such as democracy and fundamental rights, and it was under-lined as one of the most important conditionality criteria for the EU enlargement policy. The ongoing crises of EU values, and more precisely the Rule of Law crisis, appeared long before, but reemerged fiercely with the creation of the “illiberal state“ concept in Hungary and then in Poland. The EU has implicitly and more successfully, through the work of its institutions tried to compensate for the inadequate and a “a little too late“ reaction, as well as for the lack of monitoring in the previous enlargement circles. The aim of this article is to show how, the rule of Law was stressed as a leading value shaping democratic constitutions and national, as well as supranational, legal systems. It is important to demonstrate that the Rule of Law is not only “coined” for the EU or Council of Europe purposes, but that it is firstly a value that is in the core of each constitutional tradition of a sovereign state. Therefore, in order to be promoted as common and set as a strong and rigid condition for future members, it should be, pro futuro, analyzed, understood and endorsed by EU institutions on each level. Finally, we take Western Balkan countries as an example where the Rule of Law is defined as a value but also as a core basis of the Negotiation Chapters 23 and 24, determined in a more thorough and precise way than in the EU and among its Member States, where, we could agree, it should have been in the first place. We point out to the need of getting closer to its uniform understanding in and outside of the EU and therefore to the need to create a continuous and stable Rule of Law concept both substantially and formally.","PeriodicalId":448091,"journal":{"name":"EU 2020 – lessons from the past and solutions for the future","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EU 2020 – lessons from the past and solutions for the future","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25234/eclic/11903","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

For decades the Rule of Law has been emphasized as a core constitutional value common to all Member States of the European Union, although its substantial content was not precisely determined enough in the European context. Moreover it was defined as a multilayered value that encompasses other values such as democracy and fundamental rights, and it was under-lined as one of the most important conditionality criteria for the EU enlargement policy. The ongoing crises of EU values, and more precisely the Rule of Law crisis, appeared long before, but reemerged fiercely with the creation of the “illiberal state“ concept in Hungary and then in Poland. The EU has implicitly and more successfully, through the work of its institutions tried to compensate for the inadequate and a “a little too late“ reaction, as well as for the lack of monitoring in the previous enlargement circles. The aim of this article is to show how, the rule of Law was stressed as a leading value shaping democratic constitutions and national, as well as supranational, legal systems. It is important to demonstrate that the Rule of Law is not only “coined” for the EU or Council of Europe purposes, but that it is firstly a value that is in the core of each constitutional tradition of a sovereign state. Therefore, in order to be promoted as common and set as a strong and rigid condition for future members, it should be, pro futuro, analyzed, understood and endorsed by EU institutions on each level. Finally, we take Western Balkan countries as an example where the Rule of Law is defined as a value but also as a core basis of the Negotiation Chapters 23 and 24, determined in a more thorough and precise way than in the EU and among its Member States, where, we could agree, it should have been in the first place. We point out to the need of getting closer to its uniform understanding in and outside of the EU and therefore to the need to create a continuous and stable Rule of Law concept both substantially and formally.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
法治——欧盟共同的宪法“分母”,是法治价值在欧盟背景下角色变迁与演化的关键成员条件
几十年来,法治一直被强调为欧洲联盟所有成员国共同的核心宪法价值,尽管其实质内容没有在欧洲范围内得到足够精确的确定。此外,它被定义为包含民主和基本权利等其他价值观的多层价值,并被强调为欧盟扩大政策最重要的条件标准之一。欧盟价值观的持续危机,更确切地说,是法治危机,在很久以前就出现了,但随着匈牙利和波兰“非自由国家”概念的产生,它们又猛烈地出现了。欧盟通过其机构的工作,含蓄地、更成功地试图弥补不充分和“有点太晚”的反应,以及之前扩大圈子中缺乏监督。本文的目的是展示法治如何被强调为塑造民主宪法和国家以及超国家法律体系的主要价值。重要的是要证明,法治不仅是为欧盟或欧洲理事会(Council of Europe)的目的而“创造”出来的,而且首先是一种价值,它是一个主权国家每个宪法传统的核心。因此,为了促进共同,并为未来的成员国设定一个强大而严格的条件,它应该在未来得到欧盟各级机构的分析、理解和支持。最后,我们以西巴尔干国家为例,在这些国家,法治被定义为一种价值,同时也是谈判第23章和第24章的核心基础,以比欧盟及其成员国更彻底和精确的方式确定,我们可以同意,法治应该放在首位。我们指出,需要在欧盟内外更接近统一的理解,因此需要在实质上和形式上创造一个持续和稳定的法治概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
MODERN CHALLENGES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CHILD’S RIGHT TO KNOW HIS ORIGIN PROCEDURAL RIGHTS OF SUSPECTS AND ACCUSED PERSONS DURING PRE-TRIAL DETENTION – IMPACT OF DETENTION CONDITIONS ON EFFICIENT EXERCISE OF DEFENCE RIGHTS ROLE OF COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IN ESTABLISHMENT OF EU STANDARDS ON INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY STANDING IN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AFTER URGENDA, JULIANA AND COVID-19 CRISES: WHO SHOULD FORCE GOVERNMENTS TO ACT IN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES RELATED TO CLIMATE CHANGE? ATYPICAL FORMS OF EMPLOYMENT – A HINT OF PRECARIOUSNESS? STRUGGLING WITH THE SEGMENTATION AND PRECARISATION OF THE LABOUR MARKET
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1